Tuesday, June 30, 2015

California continues to lead like a nation-state in addressing climate change. Newly adopted incentives for low-carbon and zero emission vehicles include a program benefiting lower income purchasers and a phase out of benefits for higher income vehicle purchasers.

With a goal of 1 million zero emission vehicles on the road by 2023, the California Air Resources Board last week approved $373 million in allocations for FY 15-16 for low-carbon transportation, up $150 million over the prior year. The funds are subject to final appropriation authority from the California legislature. The bulk of the money comes from the California Cap and Trade Program. "Action taken by the Board today to boos funding for clean vehicle programs is in direct response to growing demand, and the need to put more zero-emission vehicles on California's roads," said Air Resources Board Chairwoman Mary D. Nichols. "This funding plan delivers clean air, less carbon pollution, and provides financial incentives to allow all Californians to benefit from driving and owning the cleanest vehicles."

The largest program within the allocation is $163 million for the Clean Vehicle Rebate Project, which
offers up to $6,500 in vehicle rebates for the purchase or lease of new, eligible zero-emission and
plug-in hybrid light-duty vehicles. Since 2010, the Air Board has provided 110,000 rebates for a total of $230 million.

The table below summarizes the rebates that will be available for low and moderate income individuals. Higher income individuals (individuals >$250k; joint filers >$500k) will no longer be eligible for rebates for battery or plug-in hybrid vehicles, thus addressing a concern that the program was providing benefits to those who do not need it.

In addition to the light duty vehicle incentives, other programs within the allocation include zero emission truck and bus pilot programs and continuation of the truck loan assistance program for cleaner, newer trucks.

Below is a summary of all of the allocations. Additional information can be found in the ARB staff presentation to the Board here or the more detailed funding plan here.

Friday, June 26, 2015

97% of scientists agree with the consensus on climate, according to most analyses. However, a recent survey indicates the number may be closer to 99.9%

Out of 24,000 peer-reviewed scientific papers on climate issues published in 2013 and 2014, only 5 question the consensus on human-caused climate change. That's according to the work of James Powell of the National Physical Sciences Consortium, as summarized by Tony Dokoupil of MSNBC Greenhouse. Dokupil describes the 4 scientists responsible for the 5 papers in this segment from Greenhouse:

Thursday, June 25, 2015

George P. Shultz held positions in the administrations of Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, including Secretary of State for seven years during a key period of U.S. and Russia relations. One of his positions outside of government was President of Bechtel, the largest construction firm in the U.S. He is currently affiliated with the conservative Hoover Institution at Stanford. His background is hardly one of an environmental advocate, but he has become a leading voice on the need to address the climate change threat.

Shultz with Ronald Reagan

Sacramento Bee Editorial Page Editor Dan Morain caught up with Shultz during the dedication of a Reagan statue at the California Capitol this week and wrote about his conversation in a column today. He asked the simple question, "What would President Reagan have done about climate change?"

Shultz told Morain the story of the Montreal Protocol and the ozone hole. There were doubters at that time, but Reagan "became convinced that the scientists who were worried were probably right." He framed the action on the ozone hole as an insurance policy and the U.S. became a leader in pushing for the steps necessary to address the issue. Schultz described this "insurance policy" as "a gifted approach" and the resulting agreement as "the only environmental treaty that has ever worked."

What would the "insurance policy" on climate change look like? First, there would be significant federal funding for energy and carbon alternatives. Second, there would be a carbon tax at the source (e.g. at oil wells) with the money returned to citizens as a "carbon dividend." On the insurance policy approach: "That'd be the Ronald Reagan way."

This isn't the first time Shultz has discussed what Reagan would do on climate change. Earlier this year, he wrote a column in the Washington Post: A Reagan Approach to Climate Change He provides a little more detail of his experience with the Montreal Protocol on ozone and the two-pronged insurance policy strategy, concluding "Before you get mugged by reality, take out an insurance policy. It's the Reagan way."

Tuesday, June 23, 2015

Earlier this month I watched Tom Steyer make a clear case
for divestment from fossil fuels before the California State Teachers
Retirement System Board in Sacramento. The video of the presentation is
now available and linked below.

Steyer laid out five criteria for evaluating divestment:

1. Does the group of companies cause harm to society?

2. Is there a realistic replacement for the product or service they
provide?

3. Is it a long-term asset appropriate for large long-term pension funds?

4. Does engagement with management offer any prospect of improving the
investment?

5. What is is the financial impact to the retirement portfolio?

Steyer showed that fossil fuel investments fail in all five areas.

He provided data indicating that fossil fuel investments have actually
performed worse than other investments. He also questioned the value of
existing fossil fuel companies, arguing that their reserves will become
stranded assets as the world addresses climate change by reducing fossil fuel
use.

On the issue of whether the fossil fuel companies can reform themselves, he
said that if you look at the annual reports of the petroleum companies, it is
clear they are very reluctant to change their strategic thinking about their
long term role.

Steyer said that alternative energy is growing rapidly in California and he
expect there to be over 500,000 clean energy jobs in the state by the end of
the year: "We are seeing something very good happening here in terms
of the state push for clean energy."

Steyer's initial comments to CalSTRS are in the first 15 minutes or so of the
video, followed by Q&A with CalSTRS board members.

The combined average temperature over global land and ocean
surfaces for May 2015 was the highest for May in the 136-year period of record,
at 0.87°C (1.57°F) above the 20th century average of 14.8°C (58.6°F),
surpassing the previous record set just one year ago by 0.08°C (0.14°F). This
ties with February 1998 as the fourth highest monthly departure from average
for any month on record. The two highest monthly departures from average
occurred earlier this year in February and March, both at 0.89°C (1.60°F) above
the 20th century average for their respective months.

Monday, June 22, 2015

A few days ago, I attended a Climate One event in San Francisco
featuring former George H.W. Bush EPA Secretary Bill Reilly and Executive
Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change Christiana Figueres.

I came away with renewed hope that there will be success at the upcoming Paris
Climate Summit.

Both Reilly and Figueres expressed optimism, but cautioned that the Paris
agreement may not be as strong as many would like. Reilly suggested the
"bar" has been set low enough that success in Paris will be
inevitable. Figueres said the Paris agreement will be more about
"what" we need to do moving forward than "how" we will get
there. Terms like "baseline" and "first step" were
used.

Figueres said that 39 countries have so far submitted plans for how they will
achieve emission reductions and she expects twice that many to be completed by
the time the Paris Summit opens in December. She said that every country
is engaged in the process. She also said that in a meeting in Bonn
earlier this month, there is a new push to limit global temperature to 1.5 degrees
Celsius rather than the 2 degrees that is the more common goal being pushed by
climate leaders.

Figueres noted much more climate change awareness outside of the U.S.
Reilly estimated there are about 100 Republican members of Congress in
the "Climate Closet." According to Reilly, they are fully aware
of the climate issue and the need for action, but have had to remain publicly
aligned with climate deniers for political reasons. He said he is being
told by those in the Climate Closet that they are not hearing from constituents
about climate change The implication is that increased community and
direct engagement with these officials could bring them out of the closet.

Search This Blog

Translate

Follow by Email

About Me

Michael Paparian has over 35 years experience working on environmental finance and environmental policy issues. He has held a variety of positions inside and outside state government, including Deputy State Treasurer, Executive Director of the California Pollution Control Financing Authority, Special Consultant to the California Environmental Protection Agency, Board Member of the Integrated Waste Management Board and Sierra Club California State Director.